that is PREPOSTEROUS. more of the 'we don't want any laws at all'
HOW THE HELL can you describe something if you can't use the name or the appearance?
the weight? tap it with a tuning fork?
Well, you could say "semi-automatics with detachable magazines", for instance. Or "handguns". Or "weapons of caliber greater than .45". Those are all definitions that are impossible to work around.
fuck that, pistol grips and detachable stocks aren't dangerous? why, then, does the ACTUAL expert, the cop, disagree?
Because he has an agenda. Pistol grips SIMPLY ARE NOT DANGEROUS, and that cop lost all credibility with me when he said that. The notion that it helps you "spray bullets" is just stupid: semi-automatics do not "spray". They are designed to enforce proper shooting postures and reduce drops. Period.
Detachable magazines are dangerous, particularly when they are large. It would be a good idea to limit their size. Koppel even says so later, though he also says it would be kind of pointless given how many of them are already out there.
BUT NO 30 ROUNDS MAGS. ONLY 10 ROUND MAGS, WHICH IS AN IMPROVEMENT.
It is. You seem to think magazine size has something to do with the weapon itself; I don't think you quite "get" how this works. You buy a rifle like a Bushmaster. It can accept detachable magazines. Separately, you buy magazines for it. We should set a legal limit on the size of those magazines (Koppel even says he has no problem with that). But that has nothing to do with the gun.
doesn't the maker need a LICENSE from like, ATF i'd guess, to introduce new models?
i think someone would have the option to say 'that's the same gun you made before, that is banned, you can't sell that one either'
People hoped so in '94. But the ATF is stuck by the fact that because the Bushmaster is not in any objective way more dangerous than any other semi-automatic, they couldn't ban a re-branded Bushmaster without banning every other semi-automatic.
= new reply since forum marked as read
